On 9/7/06, Designer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Elliot Schoemaker wrote: [snipped]
>
> Has this become a philosophical discussion yet? I quite like the idea
> of such a topic.
>
> - Elliot
>
OK, so how far do we take this thinking on semantics etc. For example,
many people use a div called 'header'. Suppose I decide to put this at
the bottom?!!! Taking this to the extreme, it suggests that 'header' is
presentational/positional.
So, what we need is a summary of useful 'box-names' which are
semantically sound, but which don't actually mean anything!
I'm calling this the 'standards contradiction syndrome'. :-)
Actually, looking back over my last few projects, I've used #header,
#branding, and a number of similar descriptive articles. They all
seemed communicative of their purpose at the time; right now I'm
interested in being a tad retrospective and figuring out what drove me
to name these elements as such.
I'll do this tomorrow, as I've had a few Jamesons right now and I'm
looking forward to bed.
BTW, to comment on your example: I stated before that I name based on
'what', not 'where'. So the header, being branding, site name etc.,
would still be that element, no matter where it is. Does that still
make it the header, despite being placed at the bottom of a page? Is
that a condundrum or am I driving everyone crazy?
Elliot
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
